# Towards Reasoning in Large Language Models via Multi-Agent Peer Review Collaboration

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.08152 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08152/

## Key facts

- Cited by 51 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 23 of its 38 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 Nov 2023.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning for agents, planning and code](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-for-agents-planning-and-code/)
- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05457/) (2018)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12712/) (2023)
- [Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14325/) (2023)
- [The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.07864/) (2023)
- [CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Language Model Society](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17760/) (2023)
- [PaLM 2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10403/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01798/) (2023)
- [Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19118/) (2023)
- [Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.13063/) (2023)
- [ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.07924/) (2023)
- [ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.07201/) (2023)
- [Language Models can Solve Computer Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17491/) (2023)
- [Unleashing the Emergent Cognitive Synergy in Large Language Models: A Task-Solving Agent through Multi-Persona Self-Collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.05300/) (2023)
- [Automatically Correcting Large Language Models: Surveying the landscape of diverse self-correction strategies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03188/) (2023)
- [Exploring Collaboration Mechanisms for LLM Agents: A Social Psychology View](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.02124/) (2023)
- [PRD: Peer Rank and Discussion Improve Large Language Model based Evaluations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.02762/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Hub: A Continuous Effort to Measure Large Language Models' Reasoning Performance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17306/) (2023)
- [Corex: Pushing the Boundaries of Complex Reasoning through Multi-Model Collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.00280/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 51)

- [Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.13657/) (2025)
- [From Generation to Judgment: Opportunities and Challenges of LLM-as-a-judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.16594/) (2024)
- [LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.05579/) (2024)
- [Multi-Agent Collaboration Mechanisms: A Survey of LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.06322/) (2025)
- [Chain of Agents: Large Language Models Collaborating on Long-Context Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.02818/) (2024)
- [Advances and Challenges in Foundation Agents: From Brain-Inspired Intelligence to Evolutionary, Collaborative, and Safe Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.01990/) (2025)
- [Perception, Reason, Think, and Plan: A Survey on Large Multimodal Reasoning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.04921/) (2025)
- [GroupDebate: Enhancing the Efficiency of Multi-Agent Debate Using Group Discussion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.14051/) (2024)
- [Multi-Agent Verification: Scaling Test-Time Compute with Multiple Verifiers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.20379/) (2025)
- [Mora: Enabling Generalist Video Generation via A Multi-Agent Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.13248/) (2024)
- [LLM-based Human Simulations Have Not Yet Been Reliable](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.08579/) (2025)
- [Toward Generalizable Evaluation in the LLM Era: A Survey Beyond Benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.18838/) (2025)
- [Learning to Break: Knowledge-Enhanced Reasoning in Multi-Agent Debate System](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.04854/) (2023)
- [Scalable Qualitative Coding with LLMs: Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Matches Human Performance in Some Hermeneutic Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.15170/) (2024)
- [S2-MAD: Breaking the Token Barrier to Enhance Multi-Agent Debate Efficiency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.04790/) (2025)
- [Group Think: Multiple Concurrent Reasoning Agents Collaborating at Token Level Granularity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.11107/) (2025)
- [Auditing Multi-Agent LLM Reasoning Trees Outperforms Majority Vote and LLM-as-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.09341/) (2026)
- [TopicAttack: An Indirect Prompt Injection Attack via Topic Transition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.13686/) (2025)
- [Robustness via Referencing: Defending against Prompt Injection Attacks by Referencing the Executed Instruction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.20472/) (2025)
- [A Unified Agentic Framework for Evaluating Conditional Image Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.07046/) (2025)
- [ComfyUI-R1: Exploring Reasoning Models for Workflow Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.09790/) (2025)
- [An Electoral Approach to Diversify LLM-based Multi-Agent Collective Decision-Making](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.15168/) (2024)
- [Augmenting Multi-Agent Communication with State Delta Trajectory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.19209/) (2025)
- [Judging with Many Minds: Do More Perspectives Mean Less Prejudice? On Bias Amplifications and Resistance in Multi-Agent Based LLM-as-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.19477/) (2025)
- [ComfyUI-Copilot: An Intelligent Assistant for Automated Workflow Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.05010/) (2025)
- [Multi-LLM Collaborative Search for Complex Problem Solving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.18873/) (2025)
- [Always Tell Me The Odds: Fine-grained Conditional Probability Estimation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.01595/) (2025)
- [Position: Towards a Responsible LLM-empowered Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01714/) (2025)
- [Multi-Agent Debate Strategies to Enhance Requirements Engineering with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.05981/) (2025)
- [GenoMAS: A Multi-Agent Framework for Scientific Discovery via Code-Driven Gene Expression Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.21035/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in general natural language processing tasks but often fall short in complex reasoning tasks. Recent studies have explored human-like problem-solving strategies, such as self-correct, to push further the boundary of single-model reasoning ability. In this work, we let a single model "step outside the box" by engaging multiple models to correct each other. We introduce a multi-agent collaboration strategy that emulates the academic peer review process. Each agent independently constructs its own solution, provides reviews on the solutions of others, and assigns confidence levels to its reviews. Upon receiving peer reviews, agents revise their initial solutions. Extensive experiments on three different types of reasoning tasks show that our collaboration approach delivers superior accuracy across all ten datasets compared to existing methods. Further study underscores the effectiveness of integrating confidence in reviews, demonstrates the superiority of feedback exchange over mere solution sharing, and highlights the role of capability and diversity in fostering successful collaboration.